[PLUG] politics/open source (was: T-Shirts)

[MaD dUCK <madduck@madduck.net>]

also sprach Beldon (on Sun, 11 Feb 2001 03:40:23PM -0500):
> It's really sad the way some people try to dismiss anything they
> don't like as "politics".  I will submit to you that the reason
> Linux (and, in fact, all open-source software) is better than its
> counterparts is because of the philosophy (which you, incorrectly,
> label as "politics") behind it.  The idea that openly sharing in
> such a way as to be sure everyone can potentially benefit from
> everyone's work an be construed as a political ideology.  If you're
> not comfortable with that, I can understand-- but you're missing the
> whole point.

i don't dismiss anything i don't like as politics, but the declaration
of independence can hardly be called non-politics. i admit that the
kite isn't politics and i did skip over that one carelessly.

i am very comfortable with the idea of everyone potentially profiting
from everyone else, but it just remains an ideology. have you read
marx's _the communist manifesto_ and _capital_ ? if not, i highly
suggest that you do because karl marx was absolutely right. the fact
that stalin/lenin took communism into totalitarianism ruined the
concept, but communism as such, and socialism too for that matter, are
ideal concepts. do read the marx books because i couldn't possibly
argue half as well as he does.

anyway, without attempting to get this into a political discussion,
what does the declaration of independence have to do with open source?
you know, time magazine and the new york times published a study last
year in which something between 85% and 95% of all low-income
american citizens firmly asserted that america is the place where they
can do whatever they wish to. maybe it was newsweek, i will research
it if you guys doubt, but all i remember is that reading the stats, i
was simply shocked and humored all at once. especially america isn't
the kind of system which relates to open source or the fundamental
ideas of communism. 

> > so if we have tux sign the declaration of independence, could we
> > somehow slip a microsoft on there? beldon correctly pointed out
> > that linux can stand on its own two feet without the need to meet
> > up to windows, but after all, linux is also independence from the
> > redmond diletants...
> 
> The Linux kernel was created in direct response to the limitations
> of the licensing model of Unix-- not Microsoft.  Even today, the
> fight is not against any specific OS, but against hoarding and
> "dviide-and-conquer" software-- which, in the end, only stifles
> innovation and the progress of the art.  That Microsoft sees Linux
> as a threat  is their problem, not ours.  Why play into their hands
> by playing their game?

you do have a point here. i am so highly influenced because i get to
service 3 windows computers a day and it just simply hurts my mind to
touch them. so yes, i am not yet in total appreciation of the
concept/philsophy behind linux and still try to compare it to
microsoft and others. i do hope to get over it sometime soon. you are
right in saying that they aren't worth the attention...

> And remember, Microsoft isn't the only one playing that game.

but the most influential and the one who did most damage.

martin

[greetings from the heart of the sun]# echo madduck@!#:1:s@\@@@.net
-- 
sum quod eris.


______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group       -      http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  -  http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug