MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Move Slowly and Build Bridges

2025· book· en· W4411228954 on OpenAlexaff
Robert W. Gehl

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDigital Platforms and Economics
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Better social media is possible. Move Slowly and Build Bridges is the story of activists, software developers, artists, and everyday people who have built the fediverse, a noncentralized alternative social media system. Unlike big tech corporations like Facebook, TikTok, or X, the fediverse is comprised of thousands of small, independent communities who use a Web protocol to communicate with one another. These small communities govern themselves and moderate content at the human scale—compare that to Facebook and X, which try to moderate global conversations. And the fediverse isn’t built in order to gather user data and sell attention to marketers—it’s a more privacy-respecting social media alternative. The most notable part of the fediverse is Mastodon. Founded in 2016, Mastodon was positioned as an alternative to Twitter. Like Twitter (or X), Mastodon members can post, like, share, and connect with one another across the world. Unlike Twitter/X, Mastodon can be completely under the control of its members, from how it’s run to its underlying software. Making a noncentralized, ethically run social media system isn’t easy. The people building the fediverse have faced long hours, burnout, angry debates, and, worst of all, bigotry, death threats, and discrimination. They face constant, nagging doubts: Can we really do this? Can noncentralized social media survive in a world that is used to corporate social media? Can we—all of us—have our own social media? As Move Slowly and Build Bridges shows us, the answer is yes, but it’s going to take a struggle.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.170 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Platforms and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207