Re: PLUG Picnic! (Really Re: [PLUG] The Next Step? -- was Community Service Project)

["Arthur S. Alexion" <arthur@alexion.com>]

Jason wrote:

> On Saturday 12 July 2003 7:23 am, Arthur S. Alexion wrote:
>  
>
> > Paul wrote:
> >    
> >
> > > I guess it wound't hurt to show an example of the type of computers,
> > > if any, they currently have access to.  For example, on one side we
> > > have an obsolete Apple or M$ computer, and on the other side we have a
> > > sponsored PC running free, modern Open Source software.  While we ask
> > > for help paying for hardware, we offer the software and expertise to
> > > help the kids get the most out of the computers.
> > >      
> > Bad idea, IMO.  ( I have more experience with suits than technology
> > which you can figure out by reading some of my posts. ;-) ) Alot of
> > corporate types see Open Source as anti-capitalistic, if not downright
> > socialistic.   We don't need to emphasize it.  We shouldn't hide it ,
> >    
>
> I still don't understand how this country has turned into such an 
> anti-competitive conglomerate focused business environment. To me, monopolies 
> are somewhat socialistic and downright anti-capitalistic.
>
> Free Software (as in speech) means that any companies that want to can be 
> involved offering products and services making profits. It re-enables a truly 
> competitive free marketplace. To me, this is the opposite of a socialistic 
> environment. I think a lot of companies are just scared that they can't 
> compete in a fair environment, and they might be right.
>  
Jason, don't confuse *capitalism* with *free markets and competition*.  
*Capitalism* is about making money off of /investing wealth/ versus 
making money off of /work, ideas and talent/.  In my experience, 
capitalism is a principle sacred to its adherents, where as *free 
markets* and *competition* are doctrines of convenience, much like 
/states rights/.  When pro-competition laws like the anti-trust laws 
interfere with profits, capitalists find it easy and not ideologically 
inconsistent to oppose them (just like many self-professed states-rights 
conservatives are happy to support federal laws. like the "Protection of 
Marriage Act", that usurp traditional state authority).  In capitalism, 
labor, ideas and talent are commodities that can be bought and sold with 
/capital/.  In capitalism, it is not so important that work, innovation 
and talent create value, as the idea that capital investment facilitates 
work and innovation.

Free software threatens capitalism because it blurs the definition of 
private property, thereby weakening the power of capital.  In the open 
source movement, as I understand it, the power lies in combining work, 
ideas and talent, through sharing of their fruits via free software and 
open source code.  Capital, though not irrelvant, becomes peripheral.  
(Let me try a metaphor.  In the secret, proprietary software world, 
capital is the fuel that drives the engine, whereas, in the open source 
world, it is merely a lubricant -- necessary to the continued operation, 
but not the driving force.)

[sorry for getting so off track, if not off topic]


--

_______________________________
Art Alexion
Arthur S. Alexion LLC
mailto:arthur@alexion.com
http://www.alexion.com


_________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group        --       http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug