Un article intéressant sur le pouvoir de GAFAM sur nos villes (et le besoin de se réapproprier nos moyens d’information et de communication). Pour Shaw & Graham, défendre la droit des citoyens à l’information (et leur droit à la ville), il faut poser (et se poser à soi-même) les 5 questions suivantes …
- “What power have you got?;
- Where did you get it?;
- In whose interests do you use it?;
- To whom are you accountable?;
- And, how can we get rid of you?”
A la page 920, les deux auteurs (firstname.lastname@example.org) évoquent Dewey Maps!
Understanding Google’s power in this way suggests that such "commoning” strategies might be more achievable and effective if they focus such autogestion at smaller, more tangible points and densities of lived space and human relations. Or, if they try and improve life for a pre-existing community or cluster of relations instead of simulating a global one that does not yet exist. One recent example of this is “Dewey Maps” : a map being built on top of OpenStreetMap’s platform by and for residents of Brussels, as a tool to “bring together practical information to live well locally without breaking the bank”. Its character is simultaneously global commoned-tech and local knowledge combined, necessarily produced through direct lived experience on its own terms. It attempts to solidify an informational-common around a particular place as conceived by its density of relations across "all of perceived, lived and abstract space and it is from this position that a project can best pursue an informational right to the city. Whilst such initiatives might eventually connect up across space (and the protocols of free and open source software platforms will surely help), a vital step is to continually self-manage flows of information as they circulate around more particular points or densities