Episode: 3402 Title: HPR3402: Reading a manifesto: Declaration of Digital Autonomy Source: https://hub.hackerpublicradio.org/ccdn.php?filename=/eps/hpr3402/hpr3402.mp3 Transcribed: 2025-10-24 22:46:23 --- This is Hacker Public Radio Episode 340242z, the 17th of August 2021. Tid's show is entitled, Reading a Manifesto, Declaration of Digital Autonomy. It is hosted by Klack and is about 15 minutes long and carries an explicit flag. The summary is, Reading and Brief Commentary, and background on Mollie de Blanks and Karen Sandler's Teshaw Autonomy.org. This episode of HPR is brought to you by archive.org. Support universal access to all knowledge by heading over to archive.org forward slash donate. Hi, I'm Klackke. Back in April 2021 in HPR episode 3317, I was reading the Cooperative Technology Manifesto. In the community news the same month, Ken was asking, so why is this document coming out now? Is this because of the RMS stuff? The answer is usual, yes and no. The manifesto explicitly says that yes, it was written as a response to those events, but at the same time there's kind of nothing new in there. I mean, the formulation of it all and putting it all in one place is new and there's been some polish added to it, but it is a document that reflects three and a half decades of free software thoughts from the moment that the GNU project and the free software foundation were announced. In the show notes, I put together free software timeline and I would be very happy if someone could provide some prominent documents from between 98 and 2011 that show the site guides during those times because I haven't come up with any off the cuff or even doing a little bit of research. But definitely in the last 10 years there's been a couple of recurring points that have been brought up about how free software and open source have been too much oriented toward the original hacker communities that created them and how we should work on bringing user freedom to everyone to make user freedom really meaningful. So the cooperative technology manifesto was the latest of these documents and I'm going to go back and read a couple of the documents that happened earlier that also formed part of this prior work that led up to the cooperative technology manifesto. So one that was released on two conferences in 2020. So it's kind of between when RMS left the FSF board and when he came back, it's kind of in the middle of that. And it was presented by Moly the Blonde and Karen Sandler. So Moly the Blonde is a person who has been working in the FSF, the OSI in the GNOME Foundation and in Debian in various leading positions. And Karen Sandler has been working in the Software Freedom Law Center, also the GNOME Foundation and the Software Freedom Conservancy. So both are prominent well-known figures that have been working full time with community management over several years. So let's see what they have to say about these issues. It's available on the website techautonomy.org. The declaration of digital autonomy draft 0.1. We demand a world in which technology is created to protect and empower the people who use it. Our technology must respect the rights and freedoms of those users. We need to take control for the purpose of collectively building a better world in which technology works in service to the good of humankind, protecting our rights and digital autonomy as individuals. We have become more reliant than ever on technology that we intertwine into every aspect over lives. That technology is currently made not for us, those using it. Rather, it is for the companies who intend to monetize its use and whoever owns the associated copyrights and patents. Services are run via network software on computers we never directly interact with. Our devices are designed to only function while broadcasting our intimate information, regardless of whether the transmission of that information is necessary functionality. We generate data that we do not have access to. That is bought, sold and traded between corporations and governments. Technologies were increasingly being forced to use, reinforce and amplify social inequalities. As schools and jobs go online, high-speed computing, centralized services and internet become inescapably necessary. Technology is designed and implemented to impress, often with sexist, classist and racist implications. Rather than being served by these tools, we are instead in service to them. These gatekeepers of our technology are not individual people or public organizations who think about the well-being of others. But instead, our corporations, governments and others with the genders that do not include our best interests. Our technology has become the basic infrastructure on which our society functions. And yet, the individuals who use it have no say or control or its function. It's time to change our digital destiny. We believe it is necessary for technology to provide opportunity for informed consent of use, transparent development and operation, privacy and security from bad actors, interaction without fear of surveillance, technology to work primarily on the terms of the people using it, functionality inside and outside of connected networks, use with other services and other software, repair and connection and not alienation from the technology itself and that which is created from it. We therefore call for the adoption of the following principles for ethical technology. In service of the people who use it, from conception through to public availability, technology must be in the service of the people and communities who use it. This includes a freedom from surveillance, data gathering, data sales and vendor and file format locking. When it becomes apparent that the technology, as it is delivered, does not meet the needs of a given person. That person is able to change and repair their technology. Technology must have an option for use without an internet connection. Informed consent People must have the ability to study and understand the technology in order to decide whether using it as is is the right choice for them. People must be able to determine either directly or through third parties how the technology is operating and what information it is collecting, storing and selling. Additionally, there should be no punitive responses for declining consent. Practical alternatives must be offered, whether those are changes to the underlying technology or compatible updates from the original provider or from third parties. Empowering individual and collective digital action When people discover that their technology is not functioning in their interest or that the trade-offs to use it have become too burdensome. They must have the ability to change what they are using, including the ability to replace the software on a device that they have purchased. If it is not serving their interests and to use the technology while not being connected to a centralized network or choose a different network. Technology should not just be designed for the individuals using it but also the communities of users. These communities can be those intentionally built around a piece of technology, geographic in nature or united by another shared purpose. This includes having the ability and right to organize to repair the technology on and to migrate essential data to other solutions. Ownership of essential data must belong to the community relying on them. Protect people's privacy and other rights by design. Building technology must be done to respect the rights of people, including those of privacy open communication and the safety to develop ideas without fear of monitoring, risk or retribution. These cannot be tacked on as afterthoughts but instead must be considered during the entire design and distribution process. Services should plan to store the minimum amount of data necessary to deliver the service in question, not collect data that may lay the groundwork for a profitable business model down the road. Regular deletion of essential data should be planned from the outset. Devices need to have the ability to run and function while not transmitting data. All of these requirements are to be better insure privacy as every time a device wirelessly transmits or otherwise broadcasts data there is opportunity for interference or theft of that data. We as individuals, collectives, cultures and societies are making this call in the rapidly changing phase of technology and its deepening integration into our lives. Technology must support us as we forge our own digital destinies, as our connectivity to digital networks and one another changes in ways we anticipate and in ways we have yet to imagine. Technology makers and those who use this technology can form the partnerships necessary to build the equitable, hopeful future we dream of. And here ends the manifesto or declaration and then there's a footer. We'd love to hear what you think. Let us know by emailing thoughts at this domain and this domain means techautonomy.org. The Declaration of Digital Autonomy is corporate Moly de Blanc and Karen M. Sandler 2020 licensed under Creative Commons, Attribution, Share, Like, 4.0 International. Personally, I don't think this document reads so well as a manifesto or as some other kind of visionary documents that you can build a community around. There are certainly visionary elements of it and there's some bullet points of certain important issues but I don't think it's been so refined and I think the document goes back and forth between visionary portal statements and also deep into certain details and prescriptions but not others. So I read it more as a blog post with important input from people who have clearly been involved in a lot of these issues and know what the real challenges are that come up in free and open source software communities. So I think it's a document that can provide great inputs to something like the cooperative technology manifesto and I'm pretty sure it did the main author said he had actually read this one and probably did that before writing the manifesto. And this document was presented as I said in the beginning at two different conferences in 2020 and I actually don't think those presentations are very good either they're also kind of all over the place but if you want to see something that is really good that Sandra and the blonde did as part of the background to this document you can look at the DebConf 18 talk or more like a panel that's a free software issue and everything is of course linked in the show notes because that one really shows where all of this is coming from and there's a good discussion about how free software touches our lives in in every aspect of what we do these days because everything is technology everything is software and I think that's all I'm going to say about this document for now and in later episodes I'm going to go back to some of the other documents shown in the free software timeline in the show notes of this episode. I'm claque you can find me on the free social web as claque at librenet.de and until next time this has been hacker public radio and I've been listening to hacker public radio at hacker public radio dot org we are a community podcast network that releases shows every weekday monday through friday today's show like all our shows was contributed by an hpr listener like yourself if you ever thought of recording a podcast and clicking our contribute link to find out how easy it really is hacker public radio was founded by the digital dog pound and the infonomicum computer club and it's part of the binary revolution at binwrap.com if you have comments on today's show please email the host directly leave a comment on the website or record a follow-up episode yourself unless otherwise stated today's show is released under a creative comments attribution share like three-point-hole wifers